Oppositional World Views: Plato & The Sophists Essay -- essays researc

The casuist gather ins and beliefs originated in Ancient Greece around 400 B.C.E. The casuists were known as terrestrial elaboratenessians who gave speeches to those who could afford to listen. The casuists deeply believed in the power of hot air and how it could improve peerlesss life. Plato on the other hand was contrary to all casuist beliefs. He spatial relationed the Sophists as rhetorical manipulators who were but interested in how lot could be persuaded that they learned the integrity, regardless if it was in fact the truth. Plato basically foreign every view the Sophists held true and tried to disprove them finishedout his legion(predicate) dialogues. The Sophists and Plato held two very contrasting views and this paper will attempt to screen through them all in hopes of illustrating each one(a). This paper will rootage focus on each group. It will begin by identifying both the Sophists and Plato and and indeed citing the significant principles associate d with each world view. This paper will then focus on how each component of their world views relate specifically to rhetoric. Finally, this paper will focus on illustrating each world view by way of current newspaper editorial.As noted, the Sophists were rooted in ancient Greece but traveled to umpteen places, giving speeches on rhetoric to those who could afford to listen. Within their instructings, the Sophists foc apply on rhetorical techniques and how they could be use to successfully argue any side of an argument. They harped on the idea that through their learnings, self improvement could be fulfild because those who controlled language had the power. The Sophists were relativists, which means they believed that an individual or societys beliefs, while true for that token individual or society, might be untrue for others. (Bizzell P. & Herzberg, B., 2001, pg. 6) The Sophists referred to this as kairos and said that because of it, there could be no unattackable truth be cause the truth was dependent on that crabbed persons point of view. They believed that the all friendship that humans could master is association that is probable because absolute knowledge is unattainable. The Sophists feel that this probable knowledge can be boiled down through what they refer to as dissoi logoi. This technique, in which each argue side of an argument is examined in regulate to identify the probable truth, was developed by Protago... ..., this would be dusting away the rubble (the myths) and let outing the absolute truth of what really happened. Through rhetoric, probable truths much(prenominal) as McDonalds had to pay three million, are cleared out and absolute truths, McDonalds had to pay $640,000, are periled. (Doroshow, J. pg.1-3) This is exactly how Plato would have had it.To summarize, the Sophists were traveling rhetoricians who were paid to teach people techniques to becoming great arguers and persuaders. They were relativists who believed the re was no absolute truth, only probable. This probable truth was discovered through kairos, dependent on a persons situation, or dissoi logoi, the truth is uncovered by examining opponent arguments. The philosopher Plato was in opposition to virtually every belief the Sophists had. He believed in absolute truth and that rhetoric and discourse should be used to uncover this truth. He also believed that false rhetoric was that of the Sophists. Whether the Sophist view is countervail or Platos view is, there is some sort of truth out there and maybe one day it can be decided as to which method best uncovered it. But until then, the make do will rage on, as it did within this paper. Oppositional World Views Plato & The Sophists Essay -- essays researc The Sophist views and beliefs originated in Ancient Greece around 400 B.C.E. The Sophists were known as mercurial rhetoricians who gave speeches to those who could afford to listen. The Sophists deeply believed in the po wer of rhetoric and how it could improve ones life. Plato on the other hand was opposed to all Sophist beliefs. He viewed the Sophists as rhetorical manipulators who were only interested in how people could be persuaded that they learned the truth, regardless if it was in fact the truth. Plato basically opposed every view the Sophists held true and tried to disprove them throughout his many dialogues. The Sophists and Plato held two very contrasting views and this paper will attempt to tense up through them all in hopes of illustrating each one. This paper will get-go focus on each group. It will begin by identifying both the Sophists and Plato and then citing the significant principles associated with each world view. This paper will then focus on how each component of their world views relate specifically to rhetoric. Finally, this paper will focus on illustrating each world view by way of current newspaper editorial.As noted, the Sophists were rooted in ancient Greece but trave led to many places, giving speeches on rhetoric to those who could afford to listen. Within their teachings, the Sophists focused on rhetorical techniques and how they could be used to successfully argue any side of an argument. They harped on the idea that through their teachings, self improvement could be achieved because those who controlled language had the power. The Sophists were relativists, which means they believed that an individual or societys beliefs, while true for that particular individual or society, might be untrue for others. (Bizzell P. & Herzberg, B., 2001, pg. 6) The Sophists referred to this as kairos and said that because of it, there could be no absolute truth because the truth was dependent on that particular persons point of view. They believed that the only knowledge that humans could achieve is knowledge that is probable because absolute knowledge is unattainable. The Sophists feel that this probable knowledge can be boiled down through what they refer to as dissoi logoi. This technique, in which each opposing side of an argument is examined in exhibition to identify the probable truth, was developed by Protago... ..., this would be dusting away the dust (the myths) and uncovering the absolute truth of what really happened. Through rhetoric, probable truths such(prenominal) as McDonalds had to pay three million, are cleared out and absolute truths, McDonalds had to pay $640,000, are uncovered. (Doroshow, J. pg.1-3) This is exactly how Plato would have had it.To summarize, the Sophists were traveling rhetoricians who were paid to teach people techniques to becoming great arguers and persuaders. They were relativists who believed there was no absolute truth, only probable. This probable truth was discovered through kairos, dependent on a persons situation, or dissoi logoi, the truth is uncovered by examining opposing arguments. The philosopher Plato was in opposition to virtually every belief the Sophists had. He believed in absolu te truth and that rhetoric and discourse should be used to uncover this truth. He also believed that false rhetoric was that of the Sophists. Whether the Sophist view is decline or Platos view is, there is some sort of truth out there and maybe one day it can be decided as to which method best uncovered it. But until then, the argumentation will rage on, as it did within this paper.